JUDGMENT & ORDER : DEEPAK GUPTA, J. 1. This appeal for enhancement of compensation is directed against the award dated 01.06.2012 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala, Court No. 3, in Case No. T.S.(MAC)73/2011 whereby the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 5,06,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum in favour of the claimants in equal shares. 2. The admitted facts are that the deceased Parbati Debnath suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident and as a result of the injuries she died. The only issue is whether the compensation awarded is just or reasonable. The claimants claimed that the deceased was a milk woman by profession and used to earn Rs. 7,000/- per month by sale on milk. In support of this the claimant's husband appeared as his own witness and repeated that his wife was doing the business of selling milk and that she was earning Rs. 7000/- per month. The statement of P.W.1 was recorded on 04.04.2012 and the incident took place on 15.01.2011 and at the time when this statement of the witness P.W.1 was recorded he stated that the age of his elder daughter petitioner No. 2 is 19 years which would mean that she was about 18 years at the time when her mother expired and, therefore, it appears that the age of the mother must have been more than 35 years and can be taken at between 35 to 40 years. 3. The witness has not produced any document worthy name to show that his wife was dealing in the sale of milk. He has not even stated how many cows or buffalos she owned. He has not stated where the business was being run and only a bald statement has been made that the wife was doing milk business. This evidence is not sufficient to hold that she was running a business from milk. The fact however remains that the deceased was a young lady aged between 35 to 40 years. She had to look after 3 children. Even the maintenance of a house is by itself an onerous job. When questioned Mr. Roy stated that the husband is not doing anything. He is unemployed but sometimes doing labour work. The fact however remains that the deceased was a young lady aged between 35 to 40 years. She had to look after 3 children. Even the maintenance of a house is by itself an onerous job. When questioned Mr. Roy stated that the husband is not doing anything. He is unemployed but sometimes doing labour work. If the husband is unemployed and doing labour work only then I fail to understand why he cannot look after the same cows which his wife was looking after. If his wife could run the business of running milk after the death of the wife he himself could have also done the same business. The husband at the time of his statement stated that his age was 42 years. He is an able body young man and could not have been solely dependent on his wife. However, the children have lost their mother and compensation has to be awarded. 4. The learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,500/-per month. In my view a house wife in India does a lot of work. She not only looks after the children she also looks after the household and she is working round the clock. Her work cannot be replaced by even 1 or 2 servants. Therefore, I assess the contribution of the wife to the family at Rs. 4,000/- per month or Rs. 48,000/- per year. Since I have held that the wife would have been aged between 35 to 40 years the multiplier 15 is allowed. The compensation therefore works out to Rs. 7,20,000/-. No deduction is being made for the personal expenses because this is the contribution of the wife to the household. 5. In addition thereto the husband is held entitle to solatium of Rs. 50,000/- and funeral expenses of Rs. 20,000/-. The total award therefore comes to Rs. 7,90,000/-. On this amount the claimant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till payment of the amount. The amount shall be payable in equal shares to all the 4(four) claimants. Since the two of the claimants are minors the amount shall be payable to them only after they attain the age of 21 years. 6. In view of the above discussion the appeal is allowed. The award is enhanced from Rs. 5,06,000/- to 7,90,000/- along with interest. The amount shall be payable in equal shares to all the 4(four) claimants. Since the two of the claimants are minors the amount shall be payable to them only after they attain the age of 21 years. 6. In view of the above discussion the appeal is allowed. The award is enhanced from Rs. 5,06,000/- to 7,90,000/- along with interest. The insurance company is already satisfied the award and, therefore, it is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs. 2,84,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum 7. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. 8. Send down the LCRs forthwith.